Hannibal942:the only film of significance was the Evil Dead franchise.

He pops up in quite a few things as side characters too, like the Hercules and Xena series, but if you want a real Campbell/Raimi treat then you should check out "My Name is Bruce" where he plays himself. :D

I'm normally ok with gore in movies (and in some cases I yell 'YES!' at certain gore scenes) but this movie looks too extreme. I have a feeling that I would watch this and not enjoy it because of how much gore there is...I would look passed the movie and think 'the people who thought this shit up are fucked in the head'

I watched 'Braindead' and thought the same thing.

A little gore is good....too much and I get serious concerns over the people who make the movie (and why I am watching it).

Hannibal942:the only film of significance was the Evil Dead franchise.

He pops up in quite a few things as side characters too, like the Hercules and Xena series, but if you want a real Campbell/Raimi treat then you should check out "My Name is Bruce" where he plays himself. :D

What I could never understand is why people say "Evil Dead II is a remake". How so? I mean, the first five minutes are supposed to be recap of what's happened and the ending of the first movie is changed so the book is not destroyed, but nonetheless.

This movie sucked as anything but a gorefest. Even then it was only average, Final Destination movies put the gore in this one to shame. What really bugged me the most about this remake was it was lacking any suspense except in one scene.

Saw it last night... and I hated it. Just too damn formulaic. Though if you are into gore in movies I recommend it. If you were expecting a new take on the genre or a tongue in cheek ride like the original Evil Dead movies or even Cabin in the Woods, you will be disappointed.

Sheo_Dagana:I wonder if Bruce has a cameo somewhere in there... I feel like he should. I mean, I know the movie should exist in it's own right as a separate entity, but it'd be fun seeing a glimpse of him in the series after all this time.

I read a rumor somewhere that there was a cameo planned or filmed but then it was taken out because they weren't sure if they wanted this movie to exist in the same universe as the other originals.

Hannibal942:the only film of significance was the Evil Dead franchise.

He pops up in quite a few things as side characters too, like the Hercules and Xena series, but if you want a real Campbell/Raimi treat then you should check out "My Name is Bruce" where he plays himself. :D

It's not Raimi but Bubba Ho-Tep might be Campbell's best non-Evil Dead outing. And seeing as it's kind of on topic even Ebert liked Bubba Ho-Tep, giving it 3 stars out of 4 and saying "It has the damnedest ingratiating way of making us sit there and grin at its harebrained audacity, laugh at its outhouse humor, and be somewhat moved (not deeply, but somewhat) at the poignancy of these two old men and their situation."

RT:What I could never understand is why people say "Evil Dead II is a remake". How so? I mean, the first five minutes are supposed to be recap of what's happened and the ending of the first movie is changed so the book is not destroyed, but nonetheless.

I think it's to do with how they go about it. It recaps the first movie within the first few minutes before moving along, but it treats it as part of its own plot, without ever even acknowledging that there was an earlier film. And it also changes that major plot point.

I actually thought about this for a little bit last night: in order for the first and second movie to exist within the same canon and have ED2 be a proper sequel, it would have to be understood that the book cannot be destroyed, and that every time it is, it works its way back into existence. By this logic, the new Evil Dead is also not technically a remake but a sequel. It's still a reboot that exploits the iconic imagery and repurposes specific scenes of the orginal, sure, but it has its own story and characters and could justifiably be set in the same universe as the previous movies with the Necronomicon being the one link. (Star Trek proved "we're a sequel but we're not" to be a pretty damn effective element for rebooting)

Also though, for ED1&2 to be proper canon with each other, there would need to be a pretty damn good explanation for Ash's amnesia. Or maybe the first one died and the second one is a clone, capable of taking much more physical damage but more mentally unstable. Or maybe they were twins who both ended up going to he same cabin, and both had the same name. Or maybe it's just a movie and I shouldn't think about it so much...

...Or maybe the Necronomicon caused a rift in time and is fucking with Ash's head, causing him to relive things without him noticing. Or maybe there's a consipiracy of evil woodland creatures. Or maybe...

This movie is similar to all other remake movies, it wasn't produced the way fans intended it on being. Too much irreverence for the old script was forced into the script so its nothing like the old ones, it looks like they wanted to go a new direction with this movie obviously but Fede used elements from the Ring or something. What i expected to see, was a nightmare at the cabin in the beginning then bruce campell going on another adventure in the past to retrieve something or similar to the 3rd but with comedy in it as well but after a quarter way into the movie, you know theres gonna be none of that in it. Then He or the main character would go back to the nightmare he left from where the book sent him, and save what was left of his friends. I really think Fede Alvarez put to much thought into it ignoring the flaws he created. To sum it up this movie is your stereotypical horror movie of the 2000 era. But it was alright but not a movie i could watch again, i give a 6/10.

Saw it today. It was..okay. Kind of forgettable for me, and featuring some of the dumbest characters I've ever seen (and a lot of that was in the terms of horror-movie-these-guys-have-to-make-really-stupid-decisons-to-keep-the-plot-moving). I face palmed so many times.

I will say though that when someone was stupid in this movie, they paid for it. Holy crap, did they pay for it. It was like an extremely gory, satanic version of that japanese game show that punishes you for being an idiot. In a way, that balanced out my annoyance with the brainless characters.

Sheo_Dagana:I wonder if Bruce has a cameo somewhere in there... I feel like he should. I mean, I know the movie should exist in it's own right as a separate entity, but it'd be fun seeing a glimpse of him in the series after all this time.

I read a rumor somewhere that there was a cameo planned or filmed but then it was taken out because they weren't sure if they wanted this movie to exist in the same universe as the other originals.

Only that it wasn't taken out according to Wikipedia. There it says he has a post-credits cameo as Ash.

Sheo_Dagana:I wonder if Bruce has a cameo somewhere in there... I feel like he should. I mean, I know the movie should exist in it's own right as a separate entity, but it'd be fun seeing a glimpse of him in the series after all this time.

I read a rumor somewhere that there was a cameo planned or filmed but then it was taken out because they weren't sure if they wanted this movie to exist in the same universe as the other originals.

Only that it wasn't taken out according to Wikipedia. There it says he has a post-credits cameo as Ash.

I really liked it, although for different reasons than I liked the original Evil Dead/II. It lost its campy B-movie charm, but was still good for a horror movie. Definitely didn't hold back on the blood and gore.

I didn't know Roger Ebert had died, makes me quite sad, he was the first critic that I had read a review from and though to my self this guy really knows what he's talking about. Might just rent this movie, the original was over the top and I'm a bit too squimish to go see this on in the cinemas.

So not just another cash in. and i saw what potentialy could be a raped by a tree scene too? this is one to look forward to.

Roger Ebert did a lot to foward review industry, but thats pretty much all good i can say about him. I watch a lot of movies, and i stopped looking at his reviews because all i saw is pure nonesense when i read them. Oh wait, he had that games are not art one too, didnt even bother remembering that till i saw somone mention it in the replies.

I have a hard time believing in Movie Bobs "Boston" accent, so it is always weird to me when people fawn over it. As some one who has grown up in Boston you would be very hard pressed to find some one who still talks like that. The only people that sound anything like that are townies and old white people both of which are minorities. It just sounds so fake and exaggerated that I cant help but thinking its an act. I just had to let that out of my system as this is something I have thought since the first time I have heard it.

OT: Interesting review. Bob compared it to The Hills have Eyes, so I'm just wondering if it is more or less scary than that film.

Dansen:I have a hard time believing in Movie Bobs "Boston" accent, so it is always weird to me when people fawn over it. As some one who has grown up in Boston you would be very hard pressed to find some one who still talks like that. The only people that sound anything like that are townies and old white people both of which are minorities. It just sounds so fake and exaggerated that I cant help but thinking its an act. I just had to let that out of my system as this is something I have thought since the first time I have heard it.

OT: Interesting review. Bob compared it to The Hills have Eyes, so I'm just wondering if it is more or less scary than that film.

Given that his accent slips out when he's angry, and that his "normal" voice sounds so measured, I'm inclined to believe that his Boston voice is real.

Dansen:I have a hard time believing in Movie Bobs "Boston" accent, so it is always weird to me when people fawn over it. As some one who has grown up in Boston you would be very hard pressed to find some one who still talks like that. The only people that sound anything like that are townies and old white people both of which are minorities. It just sounds so fake and exaggerated that I cant help but thinking its an act. I just had to let that out of my system as this is something I have thought since the first time I have heard it.

OT: Interesting review. Bob compared it to The Hills have Eyes, so I'm just wondering if it is more or less scary than that film.

Given that his accent slips out when he's angry, and that his "normal" voice sounds so measured, I'm inclined to believe that his Boston voice is real.

To be honest I think he does it for fun nowadays more than anything because people found it cool when he first showed it. I also think he hams it up a bit at times.

I've been following Bob long enough to remember the first time when he outed it (there was no indication for a while beforehand) and then explained it, along with how he has voice training to surpress it.

Being a professional I doubt Bob "slips" unless he wants to, especially seeing as he can edit and re-do these videos as many times as he wants. It seems to be that since we accept his accent on this site at least, he can choose to "stage slip" into it to empathize certain points as if he's losing his cool in a way a profesional making a recorded product like this never would.

Such are my thoughts.

In response to the guy your quoting, I personally didn't find "Evil Dead" or "Hills Have Eyes" paticularly scary but I am a jaded horror fan. It's very hard to get a rise out of me when I go out expecting to see a horror movie, and when your dealing with such a well known franchise, and especially remakes of movies you've already seen, it becomes kind of easy to view them objectively. That said I think "Evil Dead" was far better than "Hills Have Eyes", which is a matter of opinion of course. Both have decent FX and some pretty gruelling scenes, but I guess at the end of the day I tend to prefer the supernatural horror of "Evil Dead" and it's set up.

To be honest I'm sort of waiting for/hoping for, a remake on this level of Dario Argento's "Demons" trilogy. I think the third one (actually called "The Church", as opposed to Demons 3) was lacking and could use a re-do for reasons I won't go into. I'll also say that while the original was best, a certain last stand in a basement parking garage in "Demons 2" stayed with a then-less-jaded me for a long time.

I bought the trilogy when I first heard about this. Loved the first 2, liked army of darkness. I just finished watching the reboot. IT'S F#~£_]€,¥ awesome!!!!!!!! If u like horror, you will definitely love this. The ballsy-est evil dead since #2. Don't miss this. It's beautiful. Spring breakers was sleaze as art. This is gore as art.

Hannibal942:the only film of significance was the Evil Dead franchise.

He pops up in quite a few things as side characters too, like the Hercules and Xena series, but if you want a real Campbell/Raimi treat then you should check out "My Name is Bruce" where he plays himself. :D

It's not Raimi but Bubba Ho-Tep might be Campbell's best non-Evil Dead outing. And seeing as it's kind of on topic even Ebert liked Bubba Ho-Tep, giving it 3 stars out of 4 and saying "It has the damnedest ingratiating way of making us sit there and grin at its harebrained audacity, laugh at its outhouse humor, and be somewhat moved (not deeply, but somewhat) at the poignancy of these two old men and their situation."

Well, if you want to consider his BEST Outing outside of "Evil Dead" it wouldn't be movies, but "Adventures Of Brisco County Jr." which went on for two seasons with him in the title role. A two season run (ie it got renewed) was kind of amazing given the subject matter and how off kilter it was. It remains a cult classic, and I believe probably inspired more than a few campy productions to come.

That said I think Bruce realizes he works best as a supporting actor, or in B-movies that don't take themselves seriously. Given that he's been a writer, a director and a producer as well as an actor I'm sure he's had plenty of oppertunities to take a more prominant role (especially given his cult following) but chose not to. He also seems to have been able to find work consistantly, even without Raimi, and even now he works as a co-star/major supporting actor for "Burn Notice" (unless it ended/got cancelled, I hadn't followed it too heavily since I don't watch a lot of TV on TV, been meaning to watch it on Netflix though). Apparently he took his fairly goofy character in that show and made it popular enough where he got his own made for TV movie focusing on the character's backstory.

The point I'm getting at here is more or less that while Bruce has been mostly a cult/B-movie actor as far as his movie roles, he's also had a decent amount of "small screen" success which goes beyond simply playing an occasional bit in the TV Hercules/Xena-verse. When you think about it he's had a pretty bloody successful career compared to most people in Hollywood, especially when you consider the length of time he's been working. On some levels I wonder how it would affect his popularity with geeks if there was more conscious realization of how successful/accepted he actually is, I'm sure plenty of actors would give their left arm to have his career. :)

The remake is good, but the "final boss monster" so to speak is a let down. A solid film, but lacked some of the more important elements of the Evil Dead franchise; primarily lacking loud over the top monsters.